catblast01

“ People who experience a single random seizure, for instance, are 50 times more likely to become epileptic than someone who has never had one.1 Like Philip’s raven, the same stimuli that preceded the first fit—such as anxiety or a particular musical passage—more readily trigger future episodes. And the more often seizures occur, the stronger and more pervasive the underlying neural network may become, potentially inducing more widespread or more violent attacks.”

This article is a dumpster fire, and based on fundamentally obsolete and harmful beliefs. Yes people that ever have a seizure are more likely to have epilepsy. This says nothing about why, and what follows is all poorly or non researched editorializing. None of what is said here has even weak evidence. Seizures are an objective physiologic phenomenon we can measure. While there are a wide variety of non-specific predispositions to an episode including stress, no one has the authority to claim the above. Furthermore a large class of epileptic seizures are provoked by imageable, physical brain damage and another large portion have no provocation, this isn’t some middle school angst. It also seems to riff off the obsolete notion that epilepsy was mostly due to mental illness/craziness back when those were equivocated.

I can tell from a number of reports available that basically have no resolutions higher than 1920x1200, when we know there are enough retina displays out there that they should be listed. As to the linked report. It’s hard to discount bias with a browser with 3% market share that looking further seems to be overwhelmingly installed on outdated Windows 8 machines

> i mean hidpi displays themselves are very rare - if you check any desktop resolution stats they often barely are a blip

Do you have a link/cite for this? I couldn’t find easily somewhere summarizing pixel density stats.

“Desktop resolution stats” is not the same thing. All the retina displays have at least a 2x pixel ratio so these tables on a cursory Google search are clearly lumping 13 inch MacBook pros into the 1280x800 bucket for instance.

You got a reference to something that clearly is accounting for pixel ratio?

I don’t care what the count is, you sample is incredibly biased.

> In early PC's, the way you ran software was to copy code from a magazine and compile and run it on your workstation. Being a PC user at all meant being a tinkerer/hacker a few decades ago.

Bullshit. Except for the brief period of time when the Altair was the only thing going on in the Micro space… the Apple II, Atari 800, IBM PC and TRS-80 amongst others were marketed in the late 70s/early 80s with off the shelf, ready to run software. While copying code out of a magazine was something you could do, it wasn’t even the common case then.

> Every release makes it harder to run arbitrary code.

I have not experienced this. Yes Mac OS makes it harder to run random stuff downloaded from the internet, but Llvm, clang, cmake, python from the command line works the same as they always have (you are fetishizing code that is entered yourself after all).

The Sega Naomi arcade system was basically a Dreamcast with more memory. It even used a GD-ROM drive.

> sticking up for shared-kernel multitenant isolation.

Seems like willful snake oil.

Yep the waterway through Pittsford was actually also the original canal but it routed north into the city.

The Erie Canal was replaced by the New York Barge canal system which avoided the cities other than NYC and was ironically much larger than the Erie Canal though eclipsed by the railroads in fame by that point. Numerous sections in Western NY such as through Pittsford reused the Erie.

You’re just trolling or you need a map. The Brooklyn bridge is south of the most populated part of Manhattan.

Tappan Zee [sic] bridge maybe (that’s at least one arguable line).

Upstate native here. Not sure I’d buy the Chicago narrative at all.

Rochester and Syracuse got their economic genesis in large part from the Erie Canal (leading to the NYC RR which terminated in Chicago), Buffalo to a relatively lesser degree but at no point was the economic magnitude of these ever in the same ballpark as Chicago which was an mercantile center long before the Rust Belt population and GDP peaking. There’s a nice recent article in the Atlantic about Kodak. Much like Pittsburgh (which is probably a more apt comparison) with US Steel and Alcoa.. Rochester relied on a oligopoly of Kodak and Xerox (that willingly gave up doing anything notable with all the great things from PARC). When they dwindled so did the city basically. Chicago has already lost even larger employers than Kodak (Sears, Motorola alone), the economy of the greater Chicago area is incomparably larger - I think even Schaumburg or Bolingbrook alone are bigger than the Rochester metro, certainly if you exclude URMC.

For the Rust Belt, Chicago was always literally the second city in terms of the railroads. So I’d argue all those cities listed prevailed in part because of Chicago.

People can do whatever they want with seccomp-bpf obviously, but is it really that uncommon to use it for whitelisting? As for kernel vulnerabilities being a weakness of sandboxing in general, if anyone still doesn’t understand that by now it must be willful and I don’t know if they can be helped.

This is simply false.